The Future of Digital? ]]>
the game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=203915#Comment_203915
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=203915#Comment_203915Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:15:56 -0600Fanthe game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=203920#Comment_203920
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=203920#Comment_203920Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:47:54 -0600RedwyndThe tech, and thinking behind it, could change how we look at computing. Particularly when you incorporate the idea of ultra-fast wireless connections, the device itself doesn't necessarily need the ability to compute anything, simply to interpret the gestures and display, then send all of the computing work to a remote workstation. Cut down on the power needs, keep all the functionality.

EDIT TO ADD: If this became integrated with goggles that allowed me to metatag the real world, I would jump all over that. I've no problem looking foolish as an early adopter, I'm just quite private. ]]>
the game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204657#Comment_204657
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204657#Comment_204657Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:13:33 -0600William Georgethe game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204660#Comment_204660
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204660#Comment_204660Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:24:37 -0600Scribe
Something is bothering me about this idea. I wish I could put my finger on it.

Just be careful when you wipe your ass and take a piss. ]]>
the game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204662#Comment_204662
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204662#Comment_204662Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:27:43 -0600Ben Gwalchmaithe game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204664#Comment_204664
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204664#Comment_204664Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:34:13 -0600RandomEntitythe game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204716#Comment_204716
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204716#Comment_204716Sun, 22 Nov 2009 13:46:48 -0600KosmopolitThat would solve the privacy concerns quite neatly. ]]>
the game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204719#Comment_204719
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204719#Comment_204719Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:27:34 -0600___________my daughter was like 'wha ? ' and then 'woah' once he took his photos. ]]>
the game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204725#Comment_204725
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204725#Comment_204725Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:03:02 -0600oddbill
If this became integrated with goggles...

Goggles are like commercial poison. Goggles as a peripheral have existed for over a decade and have not taken off for very good reasons - as a monitor interface they absolutely suck on too many basic, unfixable levels. The most basic being, nobody wants that crap on their face. People spend real money to have lasers shave their eyeballs so they don't have to put glasses on their face. People routinely mock and deride folks who walk around with bluetooth headsets on their ears, and those are much less conspicuous than goggles. Goggles, even in the form of glasses, will never be a viable monitor peripheral. Maybe goggles would work as a self-guided museum walking tour augment. But they will never, ever be embraced by the general population for just walking around the real world. This is a prediction I am confident in.

I doubt contact lenses will fare any better.

I'd like to pick apart the viability of this sixth-sense device as well, as it seems too weird and dopey, but as I try to find flaws in it, really, all the things I can think of are just engineering problems (luminary strength of the projector and projector light life, batttery life, quality of the lens, fashionableness of the crap hanging off your shirt or stuck to the ends of your fingers) for which, with adequate money, solutions probably already exist. (for example, I bet this could be made to simply recognize your actual thumbs and index fingers without the need for finger caps or special nail coloring or whatever).

Using a piece of paper or the palm of your hand, as he does near the end of the demo, takes care of the privacy concern. You don't have to project this on a wall or table.

People have embraced smartphones which demand some awkward behavioral adaptations. I don't see this as much worse. Maybe the privacy of others is the Achilles Heel, as you'd basically be walking around with an always on camera pointed out in front of you. Any concession the tech makes to warning others of this fact (light, sound, whatever) will make you look like a dork.

As RandomEntity says, if this can be designed so as to not make people look stupid wearing it, I think it could probably work. ]]>
the game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204808#Comment_204808
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204808#Comment_204808Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:32:52 -0600___________with it being open source, will the larger technology firms shy away from it ? or will they embrace it, developing their own shinier, less clunky model ? ]]>
the game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204933#Comment_204933
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=204933#Comment_204933Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:22:18 -0600Ryan Cthe game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=205072#Comment_205072
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=205072#Comment_205072Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:16:55 -0600Marty Nozzthe game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=205089#Comment_205089
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=205089#Comment_205089Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:46:44 -0600Redwynd
Goggles are like commercial poison.

I've looked at googles as peripherals several times, over the last few years. I'd buy them and try them, but I have issues. My main issues around them come down to three things: portability, image resolution, and relative price.

In terms of portability, none of the models I've seen have mentioned a thing about battery life, so I can only assume that they would be wired, and therefore not portable. I want to use this on the fly, for things like GPS location and mapping as I walk down the street (like a GPS for a vehicle, but for pedestrians). This can be done with a phone, but I'd rather have it overlaid on my vision, like the HUDs you get when playing video games, which is what drove the desire in the first place.

Resolution is a more technical issue, that I'm not really qualified to discuss, but again I've never seen it actually mentioned in the specs. "Appears as a 50-inch television from six feet"? What does that mean? I'm looking at it from two inches, I want to know how clear the image will be, in term that I understand. I'm not spending $400 to find out it looks like shit.

Relative price comes mainly from being a student. If I can get a screen that allows me to effectively multitask, consult multiple documents for a given task, and arrange my windows so I can watch everything at the same time, but for half the price, then I can't help but go for the cheaper option. A few years hence, when I'm actually earning some money after all this studying, I might be a little more willing to risk a purchase.

Now, if I can get a pair that will last for a few hours, allow me to see the world around me, and interface with a mobile device, I'd be all over that. ]]>
the game changer?http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=205092#Comment_205092
http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=7254&Focus=205092#Comment_205092Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:01:53 -0600Fan
Resolution is a more technical issue, that I'm not really qualified to discuss, but again I've never seen it actually mentioned in the specs